In re Voit

Four claims (numbered, respectively, 3, 4, 6, and 7) of appellants' application for patent on a footba1! are listed in the record as being *738involved in this appeal from the decision, of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming that of the examiner rejecting them.

All four claims were rejected by the examiner as lacking invention over prior art which he cited. Claim 6 (which seems to have been substituted for an original claim, numbered 5) was additionally rejected by the examiner (1) “for being vague and indefinite,” and (2) “for being inaccurate and misleading.” Claim…